i am new

by knight 66 Replies latest jw experiences

larc

chris,
As I pointed out earlier, and as Stephen has pointed out twice now, your arguement about Jehovah always having an organization or a spokesman is particularly weak when it comes to the 1700 years from the early Christians until Russell.
outnfree

Chris,
As I see it, the Bible characters you and/or larc and others mentioned: Adam, Noah, Abraham, the judges, kings, etc., were perhaps all "spokesmen" for Jehovah, as were the prophets, relaying Jehovah's instructions or principles to their families (in the case of the patriarchs), tribes (in the case of the judges), the Israelite nation(s) in the case of the kings and prophets.
However, as far as I can recall, only Moses and Christ are spoken of in Scripture (or maybe only in WT publications) in the special role of mediators. Moses mediated the Law convenant between Jehovah and the Israelites. And Jesus mediated the "better covenant" between Jehovah and the body of Christ -- the church.
Hope that answers your question as to the kind of spokesmen I was looking for you to describe in between Adam to the present, because I am of the opinion (and yes, we don't have to agree) that the Governing Body members of the Faithful & Discreet Slave have presumptuously inserted themselves as another "mediator" for the present day church. That is, I believe that we are ALL members of the body, that we don't need the Governing Body (because, really, who else among the FDS actually make pronouncements from God except the GB -- the others receive "new light" at the same time as the "great crowd") to mediate the covenant between Christ and ourselves, because Christ is already the Mediator between God and ALL men.
(1 Tim. 2:5 -- please check other translations alongside your NWT).
In light of the above, the answer to your question to Stephen: "how would one carry out the preaching work? individually without direction? out of random?" would be It is before God and Christ that we are charged to "preach the word"; Jesus told us what we should be preaching; Jehovah made sure that it was written down for us; holy spirit helps us to recall the Word and to demonstrate Christian love, and we each have an individual responsibility to evangelize. (Even the WTBTS reminds us of this.) --2 Tim. 4:1-5.
However, Christ did not micromanage the ministry -- no records, no time reports, no canned presentations, informal witnessing in peoples homes as long as they WANTED to hear the message and would be hospitable. If the message was received unfavorably, they were left alone. (Bible is silent on return visits to individuals.)
As regards Jerusalem: you are, of course, correct that Jerusalem fell twice. I was speaking of the ancient fall, the time of total destruction, when the Israelites who were still alive were taken into exile to Babylon. This is the date it would be wise to investigate.
The "line of channel used by Jah cannot be proved clearly as claimed." (Sneaky of me to use your own words against you, isn't it?) On another thread I suggested that the math be done -- number of "anointed" Christians before apostasy set in plus number of Christians professing such anointing since the "other sheep" were identified in 1935 subtracted from 144,000 divided by the intervening number of years equals what average number of anointed representatives of Christ on earth in any given year? Not much of an organization, is it? Rather like the mere 70 or so sent out by Christ himself on one recorded occasion. But not the growth one would expect of an "organization" which had the backing of holy spirit and the leadership of Christ Jesus himself.
I want to make clear to you, Chris, that I am not a member of any particular Christian denomination. However, your words concerning "if it's Jehovah's work & backing, it will prevail" -- meaning, I assume, the WTBTS -- could very well also be applied to orthodox Christianity, couldn't they? AND orthodox Christianity CAN trace its "organization" back through the past 1700 years to the Christian congregation(s) set up by Jesus' apostles and disciples.
Food for thought.
chris_mj_gum18

outnfree, larc, & stephenw20,
Matthew 7:6
Job 27:8
Daniel 11:32
Colossians 2:8
1 Timothy 6:3-5, 20, 21
Matthew 7:15-23
Some interesting texts to review, even better with not just the King James Version. Jesus himself has established the organization, true Christianity. In his time, there was no doubt as to who has Jehovah's approval. Logically, the organization who follows that model left by Jesus closely will likewise have Jehovah's approval. Lastly, Jehovah's Day will show.......
larc

chris,
I really do not think these scriptures have any bearing on my question about the 1700 year time period I mentioned.
stephenw20

Chris,
for those who dont have access to the online bible, i thought I would bring out the texts so all can get to your point of reference here..............
my only question is....What are these texts supposed to support.
Please do not revert to the WTBTS form of writing or of explanation. While every post and response is accepted here(save personal attacks, profanity) it would be good to realize. many here have done research that will simply DESTROY any CREDABLITY an argument from the WTBTS has to offer.
I would suggest in the future, if you are making a point by way of scriptural reference.........MAKE THE POINT CLEAR...so we can see what you are referring to .......
I am left with an idea you are indicating larc, out&free and myself , are all speaking against Christ and god.
I would not like to say this as i would RATHER SEE IT WRITTEN BY YOU!>
Mat 7:6
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast
ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them
under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
Job 27:8
For what [is] the hope of the hypocrite, though he hat
gained, when God taketh away his soul?
Dan 11:32
And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he
corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their
God shall be strong, and do [exploits].
Col 2:8
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and
vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the
rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
1Ti 6:3
If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, [even] the words of our Lord JesusChrist, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

1Ti 6:4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions
and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife,
railings, evil surmisings,

1Ti 6:5
Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness from such withdraw thyself.
1Ti 6:20
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust,
avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of
science falsely so called:

1Ti 6:21
Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.
Grace [be] with thee. Amen. [[[The first to Timothy was
written from Laodicea, which is the chiefest city of Phrygia Pacatiana.]]]
Mat 7:15
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's
clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Mat 7:16
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

Mat 7:17
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

Mat 7:18
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Mat 7:19
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn
own, and cast into the fire.
Mat 7:20
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Mat 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Mat 7:22
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not
prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out
devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you:
depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
_____________
Just to finish up.
larc asked a direct question as did I about the 1700 years. I also asked if you felt the GB , the FDS, And the elders , had appointments based on the Holy Spirit.
You have not answered.
This board does not respond very well to the" Sheparding call" types of arguments , where a point is brought up andthen in reply, we are suggested to "Look over here" and change the subject.
So with all respect for you andyour faith , your knowlege and your skills of debate.
COME CLEAN and cut the BULLS**T!
Love the day!
Stephen
PS
dont ever confuse logic and god ........they are not one & the same.
God is ANYTHING but logical.
We have how many planets in our solar system,
where are the dinosaurs......
why does our earth simply hang in mid air.............
why do babies die
go please now , and show me this logic you refer to........
S
outnfree

Dear Chris,
I hope you do not feel that I am trying to "rip you open" -- Matt. 7:6
And, the above scriptures seem, rather, to be name-calling on your part when I thought that I had been quite civil, honest and sane in my posts.
I am rather hurt that you assume that I have produced "bad fruitage" in my life when you do not yet know much about me, but am sure you did not mean to be unkind. Rather, I wonder if you were taken aback by the questions raised by myself and others on this thread, and, having no ready answers, decided to paint us with an apostate brush rather than spending time to ponder and do research.
You see, larc, stephen and I DID take the time to look up the cited scriptures (me in my NWT ) this AM.
The information on the foundational [to much of JW doctrine] date of 607 BCE for Jerusalem's fall can be found from "WTBTS-approved" sources -- that is, encyclopedias and non-religious websites. I did not ask you to do anything that would put your standing in the congregation in any more jeopardy than posting on this site might. But I'm thinking you did not do the research. Why? What have you to fear? Please research your Watchtowersfrom last fall/early this year. There is an article, on which I cannot put my hands at the moment, about not having to believe what is clearly untruth even if the source appears to be impeccably credentialed (sp?). If something doesn't ring true to your common sense (or Bible-trained conscience), you are NOT REQUIRED TO BELIEVE.
I took the Society at their word on several doctrines that I believe to be extra-Biblical: Suppose the "other sheep" were Gentiles needing to be brought into a covenant relationship which Jesus' apostles already enjoyed because of being member's of Jehovah's flock under the old Law Covenant, for example?
I do NOT reject Jehovah, Jesus Christ or the inspired Scriptures. I do not even reject ALL of the teachings of the WTBTS. But I DO realize that if I disbelieve just ONE, and do not even share it with anyone else but merely disbelieve ONE teaching in my own mind, I am considered an apostate worthy of shunning. Seems pretty cruel and unbalanced, doesn't it?

I am sorry that this thread seems to be ending with your feeling a need to run from us rather than having a continuing dialogue. I had hoped that I here met the requirements of 1 Peter 3:15.
My life would have been so much simpler if I had not decided to take up the challenge of holding my JW faith up to the very same type of examination that former religions are held up to when a Bible Study begins with a prospective Witness. May I suggest that you search the history of your own institution using only the published writings of C.T. Russell and his successors (named and anonymous) and see if you mightn't view the leaders and writings of "Babylon the Great" with a decidedly less critical eye?
I am lost. But at least I know it.
outnfree
larc

chris,
Your approach reminds me of several JWs I have seen before. They come here with a very proud attitude. They make sweeping statements and vague assertions with no support. Chris, you get a pat on the back at the Kingsom Hall for that kind of verbiage. At the door, you get away with it because people don't give it much thought. So, what happens here when people ask you calmly and rationaly for you to prove your assertions? Well, you fit right into the JW mold. You attack and insult the questioner. You see, in your mind if we are gullible, that is good, we are "meek and teachable." However, if we ask for proof we are evil. Makes life very simple and easy for you doesn't Chris. I am not offended Chris. I am amused. Your reaction is so predictable.
crossroads

Chris; sorry I dropped out of this debate, but it seems smarter
minds than mine continued on with it. But you asked me
a question on the first page and I would like to answer it
for you. Your question was what was my point ? Simple really
the stooges could not answer the very same question you
are trying to defend here-they changed the subject.
One thing about the debate since I left the room. I believe
you said something about the early organized chruch.
Paul came and debated with the mighty chairmen Peter
himself. Peter said yep your right. Did Peter say do you
know who your talking too? I spent over three years side
by side our LORD and SAVIOR. Who are you? Was there
any conspirecy set up to discredit Paul-after all Peter had
the power to do so. Point-when if ever has the GB ever
listened to anyone even if that one belongs to the FDS
or have they instead tried to discredit all other thoughts.
Conspired to make them look apostate although they
were not. I'm pretty sure Paul would have applauded
Ray Franz. It's a shame Peter wasn't there nope only
Uncle Fred.
Peace and Love -Mark
chris_mj_gum18

Brenda/outnfree, larc, stephenw20:
One question: all these debates are for whose glory? Jehovah God, Jesus Christ or mortal man?
Matthew 12: 31-37
Matthew 24: 42-44, 48-51
1 Peter 2: 19-23
Interesting that Jesus himself never craved for glory from men except that it be directed to Jehovah God alone.
stephenw20

Chris,
I am not going to respond to your last post , as you have responded to none of my own.
I will not DEBATE with you as you have changed the subject several times now.
I agree with larc when he said
"Your reaction is so predictable."
if you spent any time reading other threads and posts, you may see my response will be predictable as well.
If you are happy with all you know and believe, why are you here.If this organization you claim has all this psirit floating through it is so wonderful, why do you come here to discuss your objections?
. Just a note , we do read other posts, and when you do not make consistant statements, it just serves to dwindle your own credibility.
Dont fret over it. Being a former witness I am quite use to an opinion , a teaching , a belief changing. Or even better, I am quite use to a zealous person, allowing there zeal to stand in the way of truth.
But then your organization is not about truth ...is it........its about unity.
As "brother Covington " testified to in court?:
Q. If a member of Jehovah's Witnesses took the view himself that that prophesy was wrong and said so he would be disfellowshipped?
A. Yes, if he said so and kept persisting in creating trouble, because if the whole organisation believes one thing, even though it be erronious and somebody else starts on his own trying to put his ideas across then there is disunity and trouble, there cannot be harmony, there cannot be marching. When a change comes it should come from the proper source, the head of the organisation, the governing body, not from the bottom upwards, because everybody would have ideas, and the organisation would disintegrate and go in a thousand different directions. Our purpose is to have unity.
Q. Unity at all costs?
A. Unity at all costs, because we believe and are sure that Jehovah God is using our organisation, the governing body of our organisation to direct it, even though mistakes are made from time to time.
Q. And unity based upon an enforced acceptance of false prophecy?
A. That is conceded to be true.
Q. And the person who expressed his view, as you say, that it was wrong, and was disfellowshipped, would be in breach of the Covenant, if he was baptized?
A. That is correct.
Q. And as you said yesterday expressly, would be worthy of death?
A. I think - - -
Q. Would you say yes or no?
A. I will answer yes, unhesitatingly.
Q. Do you call that religion?
A. It certainly is.
Q. Do you call it Christianity?
A. I certainly do.
now tell me CHris...how does GOD feel about , this organization..........I mean ~his~ organization......
have a wonderful day.
and if you get a chance, find a thread with Fred Halls award of the day....
YOu have won!
S

i am new

Share this